Court properly granted husband, who was disabled and receiving Social Security benefits, maintenance of $200/month for two years, as wife did not indicate, in joint trial memorandum, that husband was not completely or not permanently disabled, but parties stipulated that husband is currently disabled. Court erred in awarding husband child support of 20% of wife's income, as parties share custody of minor child, and thus court had options to apportion the percentage between the parties or condier the Section 505(a)(2) factors and award an alternative figure. Court must consider all relevant factors under Section 503(d) of Act to divide 401(k) in just proportions, rather than dividing it equally as a matter of course. (BURKE and SCHOSTOK, concurring.)